Moderators Kindness Posted February 9, 2009 Moderators Share Posted February 9, 2009 If he's happy with the sound, then that's all that should matter, right? No. Sounding good and knowing why is more important than just sounding good. It helps you sound good with cause rather than sound good in spite of yourself. It also helps other people achieve their desired tonal goals in the most efficient way possible. The more you know about these topics, the easier it is to achieve your tonal goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AluminumNeck Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 I would bet your wholly wrong becuase I have done it. BiAmped the thing sounds tons cleaner. I really don't care what kindness says about the GLX cabs being full range. the 15's don't have horns neither does the 4x10. don't try to tell me what works. I am doing it. Unless you have tried something similar you theoretical approach is nothing more the a thoery. big spekaer are better at low FQ and small speaker are better at high FQ. I also get less roll off with a much more even response curve so my EQ reflects that. Very flat. I would bet money no one could tell the difference if you ran it full range Like Kindness says, the GLX cabs are designed for the same or very similar frequency response. crossing over the 1x15 at 300hz is like turning off the horn and all of its output from 300-1000hz (which is going to be pretty noticeable) for no particular reason. Oh, and taking the 60-300hz output of the 4x10 (also pretty significant) out for no reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 9, 2009 Moderators Share Posted February 9, 2009 I really don't care what kindness says about the GLX cabs being full range. I certainly would never have called those cabs full range, that's strange. Hmmm... Oh look, I didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AluminumNeck Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 Look at the qoute from RPsands ? He siad you did. They are certianly not excelent in the full range applications. I hear alot of people complain about the gold lines. I think they sound great and 9 outta 10 other bass players that have heard them biAmped agreeded. They trick was biAmping. They worked way better that way. the issue is most biamp setups don't work well. I am contemplating trying the new carvin heads like the bx1500 it is biampable. I certainly would never have called those cabs full range, that's strange. Hmmm... Oh look, I didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 9, 2009 Moderators Share Posted February 9, 2009 Look at the qoute from RPsands ? He siad you did. No he didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 No. Sounding good and knowing why is more important than just sounding good. It helps you sound good with cause rather than sound good in spite of yourself. It also helps other people achieve their desired tonal goals in the most efficient way possible. The more you know about these topics, the easier it is to achieve your tonal goals. That's fine - but there's theory, and then there's PRACTICE. When theory trumps practice, the result is jive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 9, 2009 Moderators Share Posted February 9, 2009 That's fine - but there's theory, and then there's PRACTICE. When theory trumps practice, the result is jive. And when you fall into water you get wet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AluminumNeck Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 Sure did and I even BUI the portion of the qoute for ya. No he didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 And when you fall into water you get wet. Captain Obvious! It's all good - I'm not saying you're jive - in fact the tech info is useful and good. But IMO it should never trump the actual result - if it sounds good, it is good. How many years were Crookes' Radiometers in use before their method of operation was fully understood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 9, 2009 Moderators Share Posted February 9, 2009 Sure did and I even BUI the portion of the qoute for ya. That quote doesn't say what you apparently think it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 Sure did and I even BUI the portion of the qoute for ya. I think you meant this? #2 - You are absolutely right about crossing between a sub 100 HZ cab and another above. Crossing over using two cabs designed for the same passband like above is nonsensical. Anyways.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AluminumNeck Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 I think it says exactly what it says. He attributed a specific fq tunning band that you said was there. Now if you didn't say that thats fine but then you must redress the qouting issues with the poster. That quote doesn't say what you apparently think it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AluminumNeck Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 I my experience crossing at 100hz does almost nothing even with a subwoofer. A becuase it requires massive power to achieve a real output. B becuase it is below the range of sensistive human hearing. cross over at 300hz provide alot more clarity and presence right where you can hear it. this is from subjective user feed back. there are great books on Bi and tri amping for use in high end audio and Sound renforcemtn. I use to set my cross over really low like that but it never fixed the Mud. bumping it to 300-375hz however cleaned it up and fixed the roll off issues. I think you meant this? Anyways.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 9, 2009 Moderators Share Posted February 9, 2009 I think it says exactly what it says. He attributed a specific fq tunning band that you said was there. Now if you didn't say that thats fine but then you must redress the qouting issues with the poster. rpsands made an entirely appropriate reference to my statement. When you get to the point that you understand his post, you will see where you are getting tripped up. The only issue I have is with your mischaracterization of my statements. In a topic where there is much to be learned by the typical person reading this thread, it helps to minimize errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blueyedmule Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 Sounds like two approaches to the same thing. For all ya'll techies, and God bless ya cos we need you guys big time, your approach is from theory to practice. For you, that's the shortest point to success. Then there's some of us that struggle with theoretical but often can figure it out a little more intuitively--hands-on, trying different things and feeling our way through problems. What I love about techies is this: they look at the intuitives, when they're done, and slap their forehead and say "why didn't you just do that in the first place?!". You guys can cut to the chase--you can tell us why we did what we did, and why it should have been obvious, and it would be, if we could get our little scatter-rat brains to focus in that way. And since you think this way, once a solution is found you can replicate it and adapt it in other situations to continued success. We need you guys!! On the other hand, sometimes an intuitive type can simply make a leap, thinking-wise, without the time-consuming work that techies need to arrive at good, sound answers. If time pressure is on, sometimes it's the intuitive (not always) that makes the quick fix in the field. Understand, I'm talking in some generalities here. We all are some balance of the intuitive/techie. I'm probably 2/1 or 3/1 intuitive/techie, so I empathize more with the guy that's feeling his way through, but I can still follow somewhat the techie that's explaining why what I'm trying is simply the wrong approach. But, technical approaches usually aren't my forte'. I can follow yours, though, and always appreciate that straight-line thinking that is so damn clear and precise. Think this is germane to the discussion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AluminumNeck Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 Right. I don't understand his post. There is no horn to turn off. Crossing at 300hz moves the range of FQ the 15 is least able to deal with out of the picture. It is also not "like turning the horn off" it is like removing a glut of FQ overwork out of the HEAVY WOOFER which is incapable of faithfully reproducing those fq's. Bi/triAmping is not about producing More low FQ's. It is about improving sound stage calirty by group speakers into the ranges in which they work best. but if you like a more muddy sound then keep runnig full range. It does sound warmer. It however is not a sound I generally go for. The other benefits of BiAming in general are more flat response curve "as percieved by the listener" with less roll of by carefully grouping speakers into the ranges in which they work the best. I am not gonna sit here and debate this all day. rpsands made an entirely appropriate reference to my statement. When you get to the point that you understand his post, you will see where you are getting tripped up.The only issue I have is with your mischaracterization of my statements. In a topic where there is much to be learned by the typical person reading this thread, it helps to minimize errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 9, 2009 Moderators Share Posted February 9, 2009 I use to set my cross over really low like that but it never fixed the Mud. bumping it to 300-375hz however cleaned it up and fixed the roll off issues. If you were using equipment similar to what you are using now, it makes sense that setting the crossover at 100 Hz failed. It doesn't make sense to crossover to drop a significant portion of the passband. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 9, 2009 Moderators Share Posted February 9, 2009 Bi/triAmping is not about producing More low FQ's. It is about improving sound stage calirty by group speakers into the ranges in which they work best. You understand the theory, now put it into practice and you'll hear even greater rewards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rpsands Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 Look at the qoute from RPsands ? He siad you did. They are certianly not excelent in the full range applications. I hear alot of people complain about the gold lines. I think they sound great and 9 outta 10 other bass players that have heard them biAmped agreeded. They trick was biAmping. They worked way better that way. the issue is most biamp setups don't work well. I am contemplating trying the new carvin heads like the bx1500 it is biampable. I said they were designed for similar frequency response to each other. They are probably relatively even over 100-1500hz, maybe 2500 with the aluminum cones, I dunno Gallien has nothing posted on them, but Music123 claims 30hz to 7khz on the 4x10 and 40-6khz for the 1x15. I'd call that similar, but who knows what the response curve looks like. I imagine it's like -1000db at 37hz though I can't say what you're liking with the 300hz crossover there, but I would guess it to be one of those cabs being grossly deficient under ~300hz, or over 300hz. I can't say which one without sitting down with them but I would guess that one of them starts to get ratty and nasty in the low end earlier than the other. Either way, if you ran one cab full range and the other with the problem area low/high passed or just plain EQ'd out, you'd get more volume and probably a better tonal range if not outright better sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AluminumNeck Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 I used to play through 2 18inch subs and a 4x10. It is not a reflection of the equipment. It was to much work for the 4x10.My rig is the culmination of much careful research and a bunch of testing. I also do not use a horn or tweeter. I do not care for the harshness of a tweeter or horn. Better to take the low pass FQ off the 4x10 and allow it to work in a more natural range. I then moved cross over points for a while testing roll off etc and found " incedentailly so have many offer people" that large woofer 15 and 18 are adequte to 300hz or so depending on the model. the 10 inch speakers though need drasitcally longer excursions to approach the same volume but lost clarity in trying to produce things from 100hz up with any volume and became muddy.it is attenutation. The speaker can only produce so many Fq's simulatneously period. I coudl sit here and disect this all day but the fact is that 300hz or so seems to be the magic spot for 4x10 with 15 or 18inch woofers. Now a 12 inch speaker with a loaded horn/tweeter may be differnt yet in its ability to cope with high FQ roll off attenuation and it may player lower yet. But you still have a form of either passive of active cross over going to the horn/tweeter. This also hold true in many sound renforcment applications I have gone in and cleaned up. Usually some guy babbling bull{censored} all day while I do this and I go in reset the cross overs and start EQ to flatten the system. Bingo sound improvements. there are numerous book written on sound generation and reproduction and how to achieve it. I have read more then a few. I doubt I could communicate what I actually know about the subject but I am good at putting it into practice. That is most likely a reflection of the equipment you've used. What subwoofers have you used and in what environments?If you were using equipment similar to what you are using now, it makes sense that setting the crossover at 100 Hz failed. It doesn't make sense to crossover to drop a significant portion of the passband. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AluminumNeck Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 no they are very different. Way different then the specs would indicate. I said they were designed for similar frequency response to each other. They are probably relatively even over 100-1500hz, maybe 2500 with the aluminum cones, I dunno Gallien has nothing posted on them, but Music123 claims 37hz to 6khz on the 4x10 and 40-6khz for the 1x15. I'd call that similar, but who knows what the response curve looks like. I imagine it's like -1000db at 37hz though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rpsands Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 Man, Kappalite 3015LFs are almost dedicated subwoofers and they handle a 500hz or even an 800hz crossover just fine for bass guitar And a single 6.5" mid range speaker will keep up with any 15" on the market from 800hz to 5000hz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AluminumNeck Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 Not in practice. Maybe on paper. Man, Kappalite 3015LFs are almost dedicated subwoofers and they handle a 500hz or even an 800hz crossover just fine for bass guitar And a single 6.5" mid range speaker will keep up with any 15" on the market from 800hz to 5000hz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rpsands Posted February 9, 2009 Members Share Posted February 9, 2009 Basically you're using a 4x10 for something you could get done with a 2x10. There's nothing wrong with that I guess, it's your back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 9, 2009 Moderators Share Posted February 9, 2009 Not in practice. Maybe on paper. Try it in practice, then make a statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.